• The HR Specialist - Print Newsletter
  • HR Specialist: Employment Law
  • The HR Weekly

Discrimination / Harassment

No policies, no job descriptions, no training: A case study in how not to hire & promote

06/15/2010

Sometimes, the best lessons are learned from the worst examples. That’s often the case with HR management. When employers make big mistakes and have to pay for them in court, other employers with good practices—that maybe need just a little tweaking—can discover what not to do. Here’s a good example.

Rescind firing ASAP to end discrimination suit

06/14/2010
Let’s say a supervisor acts too hastily in firing an employee who has turnaround potential. Or perhaps you learn the employee has a plausible discrimination claim, and you’d rather address the issue right away than risk litigation. If you offer to reinstate the employee right away and she refuses to return, chances are a court won’t conclude you unfairly terminated her in the first place.

Retaliation? Not if bias claim was bogus

06/14/2010
The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has overturned a jury’s $300,000 retaliation award, reasoning that the complaint that was the basis for the retaliation claim wasn’t based on a good-faith belief that discrimination had occurred.

EEOC wins access to Quantum’s hiring documents

06/14/2010

Bolingbrook-based Quantum Foods faces a national-origin discrimination lawsuit from the EEOC, based on a Hispanic worker’s claim that he was terminated because of his national origin. The EEOC sought hiring records for the facility for the past four years.

Remind hiring managers: What you wear during interview may invite discrimination lawsuit

06/14/2010

Have you reminded managers and supervisors that they should keep their dress professional when conducting interviews? If not, do so. Attire that’s too casual—especially if it features a potentially offensive logo or design—can easily lead to a discrimination lawsuit.

Supreme Court rules on Chicago hiring test

06/14/2010
In a case coming out of Illinois, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that each time an employer uses the results of a test to select candidates for promotion creates a new opportunity for employees to challenge that test. That means if a test was invalid, its continued use may spur litigation long after the test was actually administered.

High Court: Bias clock resets with each hiring decision

06/10/2010
In a unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court in May ruled that the lawsuit clock resets each time an employer uses apparently biased job-qualification tests to make hiring decisions. The court said the timing of Title VII lawsuits doesn’t depend on when the test was administered, but on when the employer uses the test results, even if that’s years later.

Court allows case to continue despite vague claims

06/09/2010

Don’t expect to get a case tossed out just because the complaint is vague. The fact is, courts are willing to let an employee continue a quest for a big jury award as long as the complaint puts the employer on notice about the essentials, if not the specifics, of the case.

Court nixes ‘sham’ job-offer argument

06/09/2010

Consider this scenario: An employee lodges a complaint that her sex or race kept her from being promoted. Shortly after, you offer her an opportunity for advancement. She then turns around and sues, alleging that the offer was a sham. Fortunately, courts are rejecting such arguments.

When discrimination is at issue, manager’s race alone doesn’t imply prejudice

06/09/2010
Here’s one thing you don’t have to worry about—the race of the manager terminating another employee. The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals had rejected the idea that just because the decision-maker happens to be of a different race than the employee being disciplined, there may be racism involved.